On 01.06.2017 22:06, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote:
>> https://discourse.opensourcedesign.net/t/branding-libreoffice-6-0/175/7
>
> Great, thanks for the link. Yes, I can see why that person is
> concerned, but IMHO it’s worth it to try to find a more mature,
> polished, usable motif than what we
2017-06-01 19:38 GMT+00:00 Heiko Tietze :
> On 01.06.2017 21:33, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote:
>> Why is it that you’re saying in the pad that changing the motif is
>> “missing a clear purpose”?
>
> https://discourse.opensourcedesign.net/t/branding-libreoffice-6-0/175/7
Great, thanks for the lin
On 01.06.2017 21:33, Adolfo Jayme Barrientos wrote:
> Why is it that you’re saying in the pad that changing the motif is
> “missing a clear purpose”?
https://discourse.opensourcedesign.net/t/branding-libreoffice-6-0/175/7
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Why is it that you’re saying in the pad that changing the motif is
“missing a clear purpose”? The purpose is obvious to me. And for
better or worse, we’ve set a precedent with changing the branding for
every major version bump—it’d be weird and confusing if we maintained
the current branding (minus
On 01.06.2017 15:59, K-J LibreOffice wrote:
> The best would be a Whiteboard [1] as we made it the last times (except LibO
> 5).
The pad is still at https://pad.documentfoundation.org/p/UX-branding-6.0 and
the last request for input has been done on the mailing list
http://nabble.documentfounda
Hi all,
Am 01.06.2017 um 14:17 schrieb Heiko Tietze:
* Branding for 6.0
+ put submission for voting? (Heiko)
+ should be decided internally (Jay)
Who is "internally"?
Please don't do any intransparent decision without discussion. And
please give all a chance to discuss (let me sa
